Re: [gNewSense-users] licenses

[Karl Goetz]

Edi Granado wrote:
> Hi,
> I have some question about our license policy.
> 
> - The FSF think the Artistic License are not free because its to vague.
> What is our opinion about this license?

does debian have a stance on this licence?

> 
> - The packages tetex-base and tetex-bin including files who are under
> the TeX/MetaFont license wich they are freely modifiable but as long as
> the resulting program is not called TeX or MetaFont. Is this license free?

as above - check if anyone's pulled it up for DFSG freeness. also check
fsf/gnu/debian to see if they have anything on the licence.

> 
> http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_3.0-27ubuntu1/copyright
> http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/t/tetex-base/tetex-base_3.0-15ubuntu1/copyright
> 
> - The package tex-common include files that have no license and only are
> copyright.

sounds non-free, but i havent looked just now
kk

>  
> http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/t/tex-common/tex-common_1.9/copyright
> 
> 
> Edi
> 

-- 
Karl Goetz
User of gNewSense: Free as in Freedom - http://www.gnewsense.org
Australian Ubuntu users team - http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AustralianTeam
User of Debian, The Universal Operating System - http://www.debian.org

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature